Chris at eden

No mate. Its the way I wrote it. Not that clear.

I did mine about 15 years ago and I only used the guide. I had done National Certificate previously though but I thought it was pretty straight forward. It would probably be worth reading the online TPO guidance also. There is also an ISA publication call ' arboriculture - the integrated management of landscape trees'. I think its Mathany and Clark. That is like a beefed version of the ISA guide.

Ahh, think I see what you are saying. Yes you can still fell 5 but you can only sell 2 of that 5. Sorry. Does that make more sense? Cheers,

Yes that is what I said. If felling more than 5 cube or selling more than 2 FL required. Sorry if this was not clear. Cheers,

Firstly why is the consultant recommending reduction as a percentage? There is a good chance the LPA will refuse to validate this spec!!! That said Frank Rinn did some research into the efficacy of reduction on reducing loading. From memory what he said was 20% height reduction reduces loading at the base by 50%. I have this second hand from a Reg consultant so don't rely on it from me but if that's correct the works may be a short term fix. I would not make this recommendation though without testing the t/R with a resi drill. And even then I would be dubious and strongly recommend the test is carried out annually. My preference would still be fell though. I did one recently in Birmingham, large beech next to the road. Load of KD at the base. Recommended fell with no further investigation. Picus wont work and a drill would breach the heavily suberized barrier zone that beech relies on so would be counter productive. That was my justification. This all comes with the usual caveats. This is just speculation as I have not seen the tree, none of this info is to be relied upon for determining works. Appropriate assessment is required if in any doubt.

Don't forget felling licence requirements also, these are often over looked. Residential land is exempt obviously but not all lands are. Believe it of not you would need a felling licence from the forestry commission if you are felling more than 5 cubic metres of timber in a calendar quarter if the trees are say located on an industrial estate. If you are selling the timber this comes down to 2 cube. This is the one that is most often over looked.

Yes, from a professional member, I think you may need two to go straight in at associate member. I got away with one as I joined as a student when doing L6 and they only ask for one then. I then switched to associate this year. The info is all on the application forms. Cheers,

I'm working toward ICF with my L6 and they don't seem to have a problem. They know that is what I have and are encouraging me to pursue. In fact Dave Dowson was my reference to join so no issue there as far as I can see. Email Stuart Glen of ICF, he manages admissions. You'll find him on linked in. If you struggle to find him click on my LinkedIn page via my website and he is one of my connections. I will also drop him an email tomorrow if I get time and let you know the outcome. Good luck.

Yeah I agree totally. Cheers, Chris.

There has been a lot of talk about the ICF and PD recently but I am currently working towards chartered arb and they don't seem to have an issue with PD, nor have they at any point promoted the degree. When I signed up for L6 one of the places I looked at was Warwick. I was considering bsc also. The head tutor told me that as I was leaning toward L6 I should not underestimate the amount of work involved. He then went on to say if I didn't have the time to commit to it I should look at the degree instead. No offence meant by this that is just what he said. I personally think L6 sets you up better for consultancy. If you did 5837 as part of your degree in an exam you could answer 50% of the questions wrong and still pass. With L6 you would complete the tree survey, TCP, aia, and tpp. It would then be assessed by a registered consultant (if you did it with Dave Dowson) and if not up to scratch you would get it back until it did. I can't see how the learning is not more complete with that system. Then again, if you want to teach or do research then the degree may be better although you do the IRP for L6 also. I see no reason why there is not room for both in the industry. I think it would be a huge shame if PD disappeared.

I shall wait for clarification before I start ranting. He may have a point though, there is hardly anyone on the AARC list with PD. Never said I wouldn't be sarcastic!!! No seriously though, L6 is life changing. I have doubled my income within five months of finishing. I used to get a little intimidated by real top architects and planning consultants but now nothing really phases me. Does education get you ahead and is it worth the effort? Damn right on both counts.

Sounds about right to me. You could also prune dead roots, those required to implement full planning consent, etc. Oh and my personal favourite, root pruning in the interests of national security. That is just cool.

I would give that one a miss. If you slice the top off the root and lay pavers on top the root will form wound wood and move the blocks. You would also be creating a large wound as appose to a small one from root pruning

What is he pd?

Second thoughts looking at the pics again. It looks battered, really disfigured. I would fell and replace. Not exactly a great loss.

Get one of the Phytophthora testing kits to check. If its not it will probably be Pseudomonas. The latter is much more common. If its the latter, de-compaction and treatment with potassium phosphite has had positive results at Bartletts. As stated already, assess the risk first tough.

Bit of an after thought. When I say level 3 I mean something like ND or tech cert, not these new L3 chainsaw certs.

Reuben makes a good point about quals but you can do detailed tree inspections with level 3 also. I don't personally think you should be doing detailed inspections with anything lower than that as that is what is mentioned in NTSG. Its also the pre-requisite for PTI so is the benchmark I think. Its not a bad idea to have PTI also. It also depends on professional affiliations. I know an AA reg consultant who charges £320 plus VAT for mortgage reports and can turn out 3 on a good day. Another mate of mine works for a large consultancy practice for major building firms. He was telling me a couple of week ago the he did a 5837 tree survey and constraints plan and the fee was over £2k!!!! That didn't include the AIA, AMS or TPP either, they would be extra. I can only dream of charging that. I work on a fixed rate for 10 trees and then charge per tree thereafter. I know how long it will take to inspect, transfer the data to a spreadsheet and then draw on CAD so I can kind of estimate. Sometimes I do better than other times but it means I don't have to go on site to quote every job. The draw back with that approach is, the client will tell you there are 3 trees to look at and then you arrive to find 15. I then advise that the fixed price is for 10 and it is this much extra for the other 5. Its up to them then. As long as you tell them up front in the quote and then discuss the pros and cons on site its usually ok. In my experience you will make more per hour for mortgage reports than on 5837 but 5837 are more common. Risk and structural damage reports are few and far between in my experience. I wouldn't quote my fees on here but I personally think £300 a day is quite low.

The occupier liability act does not apply here if I am reading those pictures correctly. Both versions (1957 and 1984) place a duty on land owners to maintain there trees in such a state that they do not impose an unreasonable risk to visitors of their land, 57 for those invited, amended by 84 to include trespassers. It looks to me that the tree has fallen onto adjacent land in which case the duty is covered under common law. i.e. via court precedent. You would be better served reading the NTSG guidance as that gives info on inspection frequency and all other aspects.

It sounds like the cold weather has killed of the terminal buds. Those are the one on the end of the branches. These buds secrete chemicals called indole auxins which basically supress the growth of secondary (side) branches. This is known as apical dominance or apical control. If you cut them off the side growth will grow unchecked and the same will happen if the frost kills them. If you continue to cut it back it will re-start the process of this wild growth as you refer to it. This is actually a valid way to grow Catalpa as it forces the tree to put on larger leaves but it wont flower and wont really be tree shaped. I have a jungle garden so I cut mine down to about 4 feet every spring so I get these big leaves. If you want it as more of a tree you will need to regrow the canopy. allow it to grow for a season and then when you prune it, select out the best leaders to create the canopy shape you want. Don't reduce the leader at all. To begin with it will still throw out side shoot but just keep trimming these off. Allow the side branches to develop on the new leaders. Eventually the buds on these new leaders should produce enough chemical to take over the apical dominance role. It may always be a bit misshapen and multi stemmed and will take a while to reform as you want it. Catalpa is also pretty sensitive to wind and possible frost but don't quote me on that last point. As such you should always plant them in a sheltered position. Hope this helps,

Hi Sloth/Kev, I always find both of your posts interesting and informative so Kev no cowering to be done at all mate. It probably is L6 in reality but I read it when doing tech cert years ago. I quickly realised when I started L6 that I seriously over read for TC, especially on tree health. There is a lot of strategic stuff in the L6 as well which I didn't like the sound of but loved it once I got into it. In reality this fungi stuff isn't really my thing, I like the planning and subs debates so I usually leave the fungi to folk better informed such as David and Tony. L6 is great, really changes your outlook professionally so go for it. My 2 year old was born 3 months into my first year and it is tough but if you stick at it you can get there. 3 kids would be heavy duty though. Expect to work every night for at least 3 hours and aim to meet the AC. Don't over read, you will fall behind. Its very tempting sometimes. Gaz, ask dave about the ref for that O2 transport. It was Andy that first put me onto back when I was doing TC years ago. He may still know the ref.

I think the deadwood would encourage other soil dwelling organisms which in turn improve aeration and that without doubt will encourage M fungi. I read somewhere years ago the HF transports oxygen along the bootlaces so it can grow in an oxygen poor environment, even water filled xylem vessels. This is what makes it actively pathogenic in its colonisation strategy. M fungi on the other hand would struggle in a low oxygen environment I believe meaning that they get out competed by the HF.

Done.

I think the natural control they speak of would be mychorrhiza which is more common in better quality soil. Having deadwood slowly rotting away must encourage the development of a more complete soil dwelling ecosystem which would include M fungi which then inhibit infection by HF by competing for habitat. HF is associated with sub-optimal soil conditions so that would be the first port of call, improve the soil. Decompaction for a start. Taking that into consideration maybe the piling of large amounts of deadwood beneath the canopy could have a negative effect? Not sure? So maybe best to spread it out I would think. Any thoughts?

Bang on Jules, and what was worse is that many consultants often called it a 20% reduction not an offset. So that they used to trim off 20% all the way around. This was a common theme that I used to see in planning applications at the time.